Not all saves by a goalie are the result of a guess. Most are actually just solid positioning. I am primarily trying to address the issue that Jonathan Quick didn't have a markedly better game than Edmonton's goalies. The shots and chances he faced were of poorer quality regardless that he faced more low quality ones.
This game is why everything is wrong about goalie perceptions.
A cursory look at highlights and statistics can easily give the impression that one goalie played sensationally and the other, two, not so much.
However, there are some things going on here beyond numbers and choice highlights.
First, every shot is not equal. So the 44 shots faced by Jonathan Quick were not equivalent to the 33 shots faced by the Edmonton tending committee. Quick was forced to make maybe two "sensational" saves. Edmonton buried two high quality opportunities and missed the net on at least a couple others.
Missed the net. Goalies do get credit, indirectly, for the times when the opposition misses the net. Especially when the net is wide open. Edmonton did that.
Likewise, when a player shoots the puck right at the goalie - the goalie gets high amounts of credit, directly. "Oh what a save!" No, it's not a save. The player may as well have missed the net with his shot. The goalie positioned himself well, sure. But the shooter failed to place his shot. Edmonton did that as well. Los Angeles did that LESS.
To rate these goalies - Jonathan Quick clearly played a solid game. If the Kings had not finished the chances they did and the Kings had lost - it would not have been Quick's fault. However, the Edmonton tandem of Cam Talbot and Anders Nilsson are to be blamed for the loss either.
Talbot let in one questionable goal. But it is not an uncommon type of goal. And every goalie lets these in on occasion. Dwight King gets the puck at the redline, uncontested, and fires a bad angle shot above Talbot's left leg pad. The rub for Talbot on this one - if he had been guarding the post, the shot probably would not have gone in. However, when a player has the puck uncontested at the redline, the goalie has to think of the far-side pass and the shot. The shot often seems secondary and many goalies get burned on that type of play.
The next goal, Talbot was caught in a similar spot. Michael Mersch pulled the puck off the boards behind the redline and beat the defender to the front of the net. This time, Talbot guarded the post a bit more and Mersch takes the puck five hole on him. Also, something that happens to every goalie. On a different night, Talbot guesses correctly and gets two saves, one even looking sensational.
And Quick had THAT one. Leon Draisatl got the puck with space behind the redline and does almost the identical move that Mersch scored on against Talbot. Quick guesses far post and does his slide across covering the ice. Draisatl puts into Quick's outstretched pad. It looks sensational. And I am sure we can find a highlight from Cam Talbot making the same save on a different night - where he made the right guess. On the other hand, had Draisatl made a quick adjustment and shot for the five hole, he could have caught Quick cheating and scored just as Talbot was scored on by Dwight King.
The next goal against Talbot gets him pulled. But again, no goalie saves this in most instances. The shot was placed by an uncontested Tyler Toffoli. Top shelf corner. Sorry, "Let's go Kings" grandma, Quick doesn't save this one either. How do I know?
Edmonton's first goal was the result of a similar play. Benoit Pouliot could have pushed the puck wide of the net - Quick keeps a shutout alive! He could have shot into Quick's chest. But the uncontested Pouliot shifts his stick and catches Quick five-hole. Every goalie gives up this type of goal. It's a guessing game, folks. Drop down to cover five-hole, he saves this one. Guess on a shot off the post and he gets burned through the wide stance.
And that's just it. Every shot is not equal. Edmonton goalies didn't make the right guesses on the shots where they only had time to guess. And they faced more of those types of shots. Quick was two guesses away from a shutout.
And since he faced 44 shots, he gets First Star for the game - which is why I say that Goalies are Overrated.
So based on your argument, the better goalie will be the one who guesses better?
ReplyDeleteI don't think guessing is a skill. Certainly not a skill to count on. In the game last night, Talbot and Quick made the same guess on a very similar play. Draisatl went wide, while Mersch forced it five hole. The goalies made the same guess - Quick gets a save and Talbot gets goated. But they made the same guess. Switch the goalies and the outcomes are the same. Mersch scores and Draisatl doesn't based on the way the goalies guessed.
ReplyDeleteSo my main point is to say these goalies played basically the same style of game. Los Angeles put forth more difficult shots in more difficult places. The shot creation AND execution for Los Angeles was much better than that of Edmonton. Quick was the benefactor of a lot of weak or poorly placed shots.
The whole guessing thing is also why some goalies SEEM hot and it never lasts. We see it all the time in gambling games like Craps. We cheer someone on with a "HOT HAND". But deep down we know there is no skill in rolling dice.
Teams banking on guesswork will lose against teams building with a system that creates quality shots from quality shooters. This is the Canes' problem. They can generate shots, but most of them are harmless. The Rangers are feeling it right now too.
And thus the idea of crediting Quick the first star in that game when a guy like Dustin Brown created scoring chances and generated three scores overrates the impact the goalie is making.